The Ethics of History – Just Nice To Have?

Geschichtsethik – lediglich nettes Beiwerk?

Explicit discussions of ethical issues were previously virtually unknown in the historical sciences of German language. Ethical problem areas are usually only broached implicitly, as elements of (academic) controversy. But in doing so, fundamental complex ethical problems in this field are then, at least, flushed to the surface. Systematic approaches that try to lay open the sore points and to anchor them in terms of professionalization in the relevant studies and training are scarce.[1]

Ethics as an aside

During seminars in which I have offered “history consulting” as well as the opportunity to discuss ethical aspects of public history, the majority of students reacted with a lack of interest. This lack of interest seemed similar to what we know from discussions in professional circles. There the notion is prevalent, that the reflection of ethical moments is not particularly important, since the principle of neutrality (also within the context of previous debates on objectivity and intersubjectivity) as a guiding principle, coupled with a notion that science per se is ethically neutral, is sufficient to ensure ethical standards. Such an understanding follows the epistemological schools of thought of the last century, which the Australian historian, Rhys Isaac, also observed:

“The basic rules of conduct have remained as they had been for some generations before I commenced my studies. Researchers had long been required to consult all the relevant documents, and to show how the history they wrote was developed out of critical reasoning from those documents – which had to be cited in precise footnotes and bibliographies.”[2]

Epistemological innocence?

Going back to an epistemic innocence that ignores ethical issues at a time when, more than ever, the personal involvement of scientists and their social situation is addressed in their work is absurd – and not least in hermeneutic contexts. The philosopher Clemens Sedmak rightly observes that science must constantly reach new decisions on issues, definitions, classifications, etc., and this does not function in a world of its own – as art for art’s sake. No, it is rooted in the middle of this world:

“Combinations of scientific actions are connected to combinations of non-scientific actions. […] The scientist works as part of a scientific community, to which she is accountable, and also in relation to a broader, non-scientific community, which provides an infrastructural and institutional framework. Hence the need for reflection on an ‘ethic of the community’, as is also found in current codes of ethics in many disciplines, which refer to responsibility for the ‘bonum cummune’ and for one’s peers.”[3]

Code of ethics for the science of history

Is it still appropriate today that historians, who inevitably encounter moral and ethical problem areas during their practice of historical studies in universities, museums, or historical agencies, and for which they lack major subject-specific models or assistance have therefore to rely on random selections from their studies or personal/professional experience from the field to make decisions or act in a way that is morally “right”? Ultimately, German-speaking historians should therefore also strive to overcome this merely informal and sometimes idiosyncratic approach to ethical issues within the field, as has already been achieved in other disciplines.[4] A stimulating first confrontation with this area of discussion, which has, to date, only been dealt with rudimentarily in German-speaking countries, is offered by the “code of ethics and principles of freedom of scientific historical research and teaching” published by the Swiss Society of History (SGG).[5]

Forthcoming approaches

If the suggested contexts are taken seriously, questions arise like those that were recently referred to by Cord Arendes and Angela Siebold, when they asked about the added value of a Code of Ethics and Conduct for the historical profession.[6] And it is, in fact, necessary to broaden the base of subject-specific discussions on ethical issues related to historical work in its diverse fields (tertiary research institutions, museums, corporate archives, the media, schools, etc.) by using case studies. The problem areas and dilemmas we trace there can provide the basis for a tight ethical debate, using the discussion to leave the awkward, abstract, and overly theoretical views behind. In terms of discourse ethics, as many historians as possible from different areas should be involved, so as not to narrow the envisaged applied ethics down to one field of history. The aim here is to mutually promote the professionalization of the discipline.

Copyright (c) 2015 by De Gruyter Oldenbourg and the author, all rights reserved. This work may be copied and redistributed for non-commercial, educational purposes, if permission is granted by the author and usage right holders. For permission please contact: elise.wintz (at) degruyter.com.

“The basic rules of conduct have remained as they had been for some generations before I commenced my studies. Researchers had long been required to consult all the relevant documents, and to show how the history they wrote was developed out of critical reasoning from those documents – which had to be cited in precise footnotes and bibliographies.”[2]

Copyright (c) 2015 by De Gruyter Oldenbourg and the author, all rights reserved. This work may be copied and redistributed for non-commercial, educational purposes, if permission is granted by the author and usage right holders. For permission please contact: elise.wintz (at) degruyter.com.